Papers on the Destruction of Native Birds, 189 



Secondly— The destruction of the larger birds of prey, and preda- 

 ceous mammals, such as weasels, wildcats and other bird enemies like- 

 wise operates to permit the increase of small birds. Thirdly — The 

 providing of better protected nestingplaces, such as barns, bridges, 

 cornices, bird-boxes and so on, insures a lessened mortality among 

 many small birds, e. g., wrens, bluebirds swallows, &c., in their 

 immature state." 



Another phase of our subject which has been lightly or not at 

 all discussed by your committee, is the relation of ornithological 

 collectors and students to the destruction of birds. Possibly, some 

 members of the committee, like myself, have felt the re})roval of a 

 "guilty conscience," and were willing to let this part of the subject 

 be touched as lightly as possible. But John Burroughs,* one of 

 our most beautiful writers on birds, of the purely sentimental class, 

 has attacked "the collector " and "ornithologist" with quite as much 

 I'lJH and savage denunciation as the members of your committee 

 have bestowed upon the pot-hunter, the small boy and the milliner 

 — and perhaps with cpiite as much reason, from Iiis standpoint. 

 'QMtfact is of more value than sentiment in scientific matters. Sup- 

 pose, therefore, we look at some of the facts in connection with 

 this part of the subject. In round numbers two-thirds of our 

 birds in this locality are migratory, and consequently are shot by 

 collectors over a wide extent of territory. 



To illustrate this problem then we will cite a few figures, as 

 they apply to the neighboring States of Ohio, Indiana and Ken- 

 tucky. These States, with an aggregate area of 1 12,000 square 

 miles, contain forty-two registered collectors, according to the 

 naturalist's directory. Now, allowing an increase of 100 skins per 

 year to each collection, (and this is certainly a very liberal average) 

 we have 4,200 birds taken affecting 112,000 square miles; in other 

 words, one bird to each twenty-seven square miles. Does any 

 one suppose this will make a noticeable diminution in their num- 

 bers ? And even here we leave out of account the small birds 

 saved by the removal of shrikes, jays, hawks, and other ra])acious 

 birds. 



If these things were considered the "collector" would perhaps 

 even have a small balance in his favor, aside from the obvious fact 

 that it is to the " collector" and " ornithologist " that " sentiment " 

 owes its knowledge of our birds ; but for him hardly one in ten of 

 our species would ever be known to exist, and the songs, habits, 



* Century Magazine for 1S85. 



